next »

[saturdaymorning]

The developers have actually said that their target audience are kids, and that they're expecting these kids to play only one installment of Pokemon. Each subsequent release is meant for the next generation of kids.

The point is, get over it. You're not supposed to care.

[SirNiko]

Then why do they allow you to port your pokemon from one game to the next, and force you to trade with old versions to fill the pokedex?

[saturdaymorning]

I dunno. I didn't even know that was possible. You're gonna have to ask the devs on that one. I just remember hearing on a podcast that they said their target audience is kids and expecting those kids to only play (tolerate?) one installment.

[[RM8]]

I honestly like and dislike designs from all generations. Generation 1 had stuff like Voltorb that most definitely weren't "molded for weeks".

As for the games, I find them really enjoyable. The main games, that's it, not so much their spin-offs that aren't Mystery Dungeon games. They're simple, well executed turn based RPGs with tons of possible party combinations. Competitive play is also very fun.

[s0]

the original 151 had the highest number of memorable designs. that's what matters here. the later ones may or may not be more "original" but i don't think any of them (that i've seen) have the potential to become iconic videogame characters the way pikachu, bulbasaur, squirtle, etc. did. complaining about "animals" or w/e is missing the point by a million miles.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

pokemon were always bad, the only good pokemon anything ever was the n64 game pokemon snap

they were also a rip off of an old atlas game where you had to collect/capture monsters, called devil summoner kids or something

[TaintedFork]

the original 151 had the highest number of memorable designs. that's what matters here. the later ones may or may not be more "original" but i don't think any of them (that i've seen) have the potential to become iconic videogame characters the way pikachu, bulbasaur, squirtle, etc. did. complaining about "animals" or w/e is missing the point by a million miles.

I wonder if this is actually true, or if it's just true for us.

We saw Pikachus and Bulbasaurs and Squirtles everywhere. We saw it in Gen 1, then again in 2, again in 3 if we made it that far. They were even in gen 4.

We've been exposed to these characters for years. Kids today have been exposed to them for... 5? Maybe less, maybe more.

The point is: are these characters iconic because they're iconic, or because we grew up with them. Do the kids who play gen 5 share a similar view, or do they think Oshawat is the most iconic character they've ever seen, and laugh at the antiquated (from their perspective) Bulbasaurs and Charmanders.

Pikachu will probably never go away. I don't know if Ash still has him or if they still make Pikachu toys or what. But the others? Are they still as prominent as they were when we played the games? I don't actually know, but I sincerely doubt it.

[Painting]

Kids won't think any of the characters are iconic. Kids who grew up when there was only one Pokemon game will have an infinitely different view of the franchise than kids who are younger than the franchise themselves. That's not to say that they'll feel the old Pokemon are antiquated, either.

I don't think kids will even think about which Pokemon are more or less "legitimate" at all. Of course we can't tell right now, because we grew up at the beginning, and all the kids that didn't still aren't old enough to give informed reflections on their thoughts at the time.

My friend's ten-year-old brother would probably be okay with my interviewing him about his thoughts right now.

[Nillo]

the original 151 had the highest number of memorable designs. that's what matters here. the later ones may or may not be more "original" but i don't think any of them (that i've seen) have the potential to become iconic videogame characters the way pikachu, bulbasaur, squirtle, etc. did. complaining about "animals" or w/e is missing the point by a million miles.

What do you define as iconic? It is obviously easier to associate older Pokemon with the Pokemon series because they have existed longer. If Pikachu was made in Black & White, Ash wouldn't have one. That doesn't mean Pikachu's design is necessarily better than all the B&W designs.

I think Lucario can be considered an iconic Pokemon at this point. It has seen an enormous amount of fanart and was featured in both the movies and in Brawl. Same with Mudkip because of its meme status, and possibly Snivy as well.

[baconman]

Kids who grew up when there was only one Pokemon game...

This made me laugh for some reason... :rolleyes:

But anyways... I can see how the 4th/5th gens were kind of dragged out - is it just me, or do the majority of new PokeMon designs suffer from Dragon Ball's "Fusion" syndrome?

The OG was pretty iconic, because it established the PokeMon norms, like Team Rocket, the Gym Leaders/Badges, the Elite Four. And it usually inspired great games (Pinball, TGC, etc.) because it was a game first, and a media wildfire second. It also took what made JRPG's boring - having the same few characters and options in a battle - and fixed it with their interesting type-effectiveness system and on-the-fly tag-in battle system.

Silver/Gold took what made the originals work, totally reworked and streamlined the interfaces, and added just enough growth to really feel "complete." IMHO, that's where the series peaked; although if I could add in the dual-battles and linked attacks from the later remakes (without the destruction of their balance, which really took little-to-no grinding at all), I would. Maybe the pretty animations, too.

After that, I dunno. It just seems like they're expected to churn out biannual titles, and they're running the barrel dry. And even though PokeMon Mystery Dungeon got them another burst of gusto, there's only so many ways you can randomize quests and dungeons without implementing lots of complications, and it looks to me like they've pretty much fleshed that out as much as they're likely going to.

Note: I did not say "as much as they can."


I think a more interesting question now, is that if you *are* PokeMon... and you've been taken about as far as it seems you can go, where do you go from here?

Snap 2 with full catalog of Poke's is one way, but face it, it's pretty much a moving "hidden pictures" game at that point. While I don't think it would sustain the franchise as a whole, it would bide some time to think of something...

[capn.lee]

the original 151 had the highest number of memorable designs. that's what matters here. the later ones may or may not be more "original" but i don't think any of them (that i've seen) have the potential to become iconic videogame characters the way pikachu, bulbasaur, squirtle, etc. did. complaining about "animals" or w/e is missing the point by a million miles.

I wonder if this is actually true, or if it's just true for us

a million times this.

familiarity just has high importance to us, it's why product placement is so rife in tv and films. even if we couldn't name which brand drink the characters drank at the end of the episode, when we next see the product there is a familiarity to it that affects our choices.
Kramlack's post on the first page kind of went along with this, the more pokemon there were, the harder it got to value individuals and the more you relied on staples you recognised and understood.
The 5th turned this on it's head a bit, because all pokemon were new, you weren't able to rely on familiarity to make your choices. It would have been much better if they'd mixed up a lot of the other staples rather than just making new pokemon for the same old tropes (no early 2 stage evolution rodents, no mass of bats in caves, no 3 stage evolution grass/water/fire combo).

[baconman]

no 3 stage evolution grass/water/fire combo)

If B/W did anything right, it's this choice! I'd take that even further, and offer both games a different selection of types altogether.

[UP_Kevin]

My first game, to whoever asked, was Pokemon Blue. To this day, I still consider it the best Pokemon game, if not the best Gameboy Color/Advance game I own, with the DKC and Mario series right behind. And that's after playing Gold/Silver, Ruby/Sapphire, LeafGreen, Emerald, Mystery Dungeon, etc.

Maybe what is best about Pokemon gen1 was the iconic status of it. But most importantly, it just didn't seem like Pokemon were cheap. Sure, zubat and its evolutionary forms were bats, but they didn't feel like it. They felt like pokemon. Same thing for raticate or butterfree. Teddiursa doesn't seem like a pokemon, it seems like a bear, and that's all it ever will be to me. And plus, not that many Pokemon back then were inspired by animals. Venusaur, machamp, alakazam, take your pick, they were true winners.

[ink.inc]

Maybe what is best about Pokemon gen1 was the iconic status of it. But most importantly, it just didn't seem like Pokemon were cheap. Sure, zubat and its evolutionary forms were bats, but they didn't feel like it. They felt like pokemon. Same thing for raticate or butterfree. Teddiursa doesn't seem like a pokemon, it seems like a bear, and that's all it ever will be to me. And plus, not that many Pokemon back then were inspired by animals. Venusaur, machamp, alakazam, take your pick, they were true winners.

i think this is nostalgia talking

butterfree was definitely a butterfly

raticate was definitely a rat

and teddiursa was a bear

how are any of them 'more' or 'less' of a pokemon

the first generation had its share of 'cheap' designs as well (voltorb), though i do feel that the newer generations have them in greater abundance

[s0]

the original 151 had the highest number of memorable designs. that's what matters here. the later ones may or may not be more "original" but i don't think any of them (that i've seen) have the potential to become iconic videogame characters the way pikachu, bulbasaur, squirtle, etc. did. complaining about "animals" or w/e is missing the point by a million miles.

What do you define as iconic? It is obviously easier to associate older Pokemon with the Pokemon series because they have existed longer. If Pikachu was made in Black & White, Ash wouldn't have one. That doesn't mean Pikachu's design is necessarily better than all the B&W designs.

I think Lucario can be considered an iconic Pokemon at this point. It has seen an enormous amount of fanart and was featured in both the movies and in Brawl. Same with Mudkip because of its meme status, and possibly Snivy as well.

but no one outside of the pokemon fandom knows these (except mudkips maybe but even THAT is limited to internet nerds). ive never heard of snivy and only know lucario via brawl.

[Superb Joe]

i played pokemon a couple of times on no$gb and then went outside to climb trees and play with my friends

[rdein]

pokemon is ok

[AshfordPride]

Oh, those halcyon days.

[Blademasterbobo]

i played pokemon a couple of times on no$gb and then went outside to climb trees and play with my friends

when did you give up the outdoors for forums and twitter

[AshfordPride]

dum

HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO ENJOY THIS SIMPLE GRIND BASED JRPG WHEN BLIZZARD HAS 90% ACCURACY FUCK U GAME FREKE U HAVE BETRAYED UR TRU FAN'S  

MEW SEES YOUR BUTT ANGER

YOU CANT HIDE IT